To Privatize…

@Guerrilla:

CC, when is the last time you saw Wal mart and Target Nukin it out? :-?

Murder is regulated by national law and therefore not even a section of the game…
GG

again missing the point.

@Guerrilla:

game=Market!

but you took murder too literally.

It sets up rules. And without these rules being enforced, why should you stick to agreements? Why would i pay anything and not run away with my (then stolen) goods? As long as i am sure i will never have to deal with that person again, that is the most profitable way to go for me.

How can a market function if there is noone overseeing the basic principles (that are usually taken for granted, but effectively are control)?

F_alk - right. The question is, at what point are the regulations too much. When does gov’t guidence become gov’t interference? What are appropriate taxation levels, and how much help do the socio-economically disadvantaged deserve?

Not looking for an answer - just looking to demonstrate that i’m not a communist to the free-market USies here.

whoa whoa whoa….
dont be throwing “free-market” around all willy-nilly like that

theres nothing “free-market” about me, i resent being lumped in with these capitalist fools. (also not a communist, but not as foolish as a capitalist)

@Janus1:

whoa whoa whoa….
dont be throwing “free-market” around all willy-nilly like that

theres nothing “free-market” about me, i resent being lumped in with these capitalist fools. (also not a communist, but not as foolish as a capitalist)

i was talking about “free-market USies” not “non-free-market USies”. pay attention.

Janus,
the “free market” was used as an adjective. It was not a generalisation.

to me … the whole issue about “free market” and “capitalism” and “communism” … is quite an interesting thing.
In my view, neither of those “systems” is the right. Unfortunately i can’t name another or even a better one. So one has to look at each system, seeing, what it was meant for, what intends it has and in this context one might see that each of them has advantages along with disadvantages.
The main fault in my opinion is, that a lot of people just see advantages in the system they favor and disadvantages in other systems.
Getting to far from the point now and to get back to the topic i agree, that this “free” market doesn’t exist.
There allways need to be rules of course, since as F_Alk ( i guess it was him) stated the best way to get an advantage in this system is to “eliminate” competitors, allthough the whole system is about competition. When those competitors are “gone” the remaining one might control this market (monopol)
So rules have to be made just to make sure, the system as it is intendes, does not destroy itself.
CC is right as well, that there might be a point, where those regulations might become an interference. But again in my opinion whether it is an interference or if it is just an interference in the eyes of one competitor is the thing one has to consider, when speaking about those regulations.
To ensure, those regulations do not become an interference for the general system, the one controlling this regulations mustn’t be involved in the whole competition.
That is exactly one of the weak points and disadvantages of the whole system, since it has to be controlled to prevent it from destroying itself, but the ones who are in control are of course biased in their own favor.
So the government making those regulations has the ability to change them to their advantage or to the advantage of competitors who might stand behind this actual government, whether they are known or not.